Mohammed Luthfur Rahman Vs Union of India and 2 Others (Gauhati High Court)
Summary: The Gauhati High Court, in Mohammed Luthfur Rahman Vs Union of India and 2 Others, considered a writ petition challenging the prolonged uncertainty arising from the suspension and proposed cancellation of the petitioner’s GST registration. The authorities issued a show cause notice dated 18.06.2026 in Form GST REG-17 following a field verification conducted at the petitioner’s additional business premises on 16.06.2026. The notice stated that the petitioner had failed to submit a rent agreement during verification and required him to furnish a reply within seven working days.
The petitioner submitted that he had already replied to the show cause notice on 22.06.2026 by post, within the stipulated period. According to the postal tracking report, the reply had been received by the jurisdictional Proper Officer. However, his GST registration had also been suspended with effect from 18.06.2026, causing difficulties in carrying out business transactions. The petitioner therefore approached the High Court seeking an expeditious resolution of the cancellation proceedings.
Appearing for the State Tax authorities, the learned Standing Counsel submitted that, if the petitioner’s reply had been received, the writ petition could be disposed of by directing the Proper Officer to pass an appropriate order under Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017, read with Rules 21A and 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017. Considering the limited nature of the grievance and the reply already submitted, Justice Manish Choudhury held that keeping the writ petition pending was unnecessary.
Accordingly, the High Court directed the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax to consider the petitioner’s reply to the show cause notice dated 18.06.2026 and pass an order under the applicable GST provisions as expeditiously as possible, within an outer limit of 15 days from receipt of a copy of the Court’s order along with the writ petition and annexures. The writ petition was disposed of with this direction. The Court did not quash the show cause notice, direct restoration of GST registration or decide whether the proposed cancellation was legally justified.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORIGINAL JUDGMENT/ORDER
Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Finance & Taxation Department, Assam for the respondent nos. 2 & 3. Also heard Mr. S.S. Roy, learned Central Government Counsel for the respondent no. 1.
2. Let notice be issued. The notice is made returnable forthwith, as sought by the learned counsel for the parties on the ground that the grievance involved in the writ petition lies in a narrow compass. The writ petition is accordingly taken up for disposal.
3. The petitioner has approached this Court by the instant writ petition raising a grievance regarding a Show Cause Notice issued to him for Cancellation of his Registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax [CGST] Act, 2017. By the Show Cause Notice dated 18.06.2026 issued in Form GST REG – 17, the petitioner has been asked to furnish a reply to the notice within a period of seven working days from the date of service of the notice. The reason shown for issuing the Show Cause Notice for Cancellation of Registration is that on the basis of information which had come to the notice of the Proper Officer, that the petitioner’s registration under the CGST Act is liable to be cancelled for the reason that the petitioner-assessee could not submit rent agreement during field verification.
4. Mr. Das has submitted that the Show Cause Notice has been issued pursuant to a visit of officials from the respondent authorities to the additional business premises of the petitioner on 16.06.2026. In response to the Show Cause Notice, the petitioner has already submitted his Reply within the stipulated time period on 22.06.2026 by post and as per the Postal Track Report, the Reply has already been received by the respondent no. 3, who is the Proper Officer. He has submitted that this writ petition is preferred seeking an early resolution of the issue because by the Show Cause Notice, the GST registration of the petitioner has also been suspended w.e.f. 18.06.2026 and as a result, the petitioner is facing difficulties to carry out his business transactions.
5. In response, Mr. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Finance & Taxation Department, Assam appearing for the respondent nos. 2 & 3 has submitted that in the event the Reply to the Show Cause Notice submitted by the petitioner has already been received by the respondent no. 3, the writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 3 to pass an Order under Section 29 of the CGST Act read with Rule 21A and Rule 22 of the CGST Rules.
6. Having regard to the projection made by the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that in response to the Show Cause Notice dated 18.06.2026, the petitioner has already submitted his Reply, this Court is of the considered view that instead of keeping this writ petition pending, the same can be disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 3 to consider the Reply submitted by the petitioner in response to the Show Cause Notice dated 18.06.2026 and to pass an Order under Section 29 of the CGST Act read with Rule 21A and Rule 22 of the CGST Rules as expeditiously as possible, but, within an outer limit of 15 [fifteen] days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition with annexures at the Office of the respondent no. 3. It is accordingly ordered.
